[color=#333333]we're doing this terrible thing all over again. as before, we're letting a bunch of ignorant, sloppy-thinking politicians and politicized foreign-policy experts draw "red line" ultimatums. as before, we're letting them quick-march us off to war. this time their target is iran. and heaven knows iran's leaders are bad guys capable of doing dangerous things. but if we've learned anything, anything at all, from plunging into war in vietnam, iraq, and afghanistan, it is this: we must have a public scrubbing of fighting rhetoric before, not after, the war begins....

[color=#333333]... once our truly precious troops had been sacrificed and our prestige had been cast upon the waters, patriotism and politics overwhelmed reason.

[color=#333333]for our own sake, don't let this happen again. let's have carefully planned and extended public hearings on the pros and cons of war with iran. let those hearings be conducted by the senate foreign relations committee or a special public commission established by president obama. let's do the job painstakingly and systematically, especially because election day beckons with its talons of stupidity and rashness. yes, yes, i realize full well that a public pretrial is far from a perfect or even a good solution. but i cannot think of another way to slow down our familiar passive march toward war, and compel its drum majors to parade their plans on why the war must be fought and how it can be won. hearings will surely confuse a lot of people, but at least give them their democratic chance to judge....

19

17

Our country needs to keep their nose in their own business. If our government does not like Iran building nuclear weapons, I am of the opinion (obviously not popular), that they need to be bombed before they do any damage.(and that includes the rule: No ground troops). Do you realize that we are just "Stupid Americans" to them? Even the ones that are legally here in my hometown make such blatant statements.

It is time we became the "world leader", rather than the world "follower". I really do not care what NATO thinks about it, that is the problem with our government these days, they let other countries decide what is best for the U.S.A., give orders to our men and women in uniform while out on the battlefield, and they must obey them, whether they are doing the right thing or not!

We have been in trouble ever since we allowed NATO tanks and military underground operations of other countries to take up residence on our soil on the Gulfcoast of our great nation. (not a subject very well publicized, I might add).

I believe that we need a missile shield and a strong Navy and Military. Nobody would dare mess with us then! We need to get tough and make better choices.

I don't personally know any Iranians so have never heard any Iranian say they think I am a stupid American.

I think our country needs to mind its own business. We should've minded our own business in 1953 as well but the CIA masterminded the overthrow of Mossadegh.

In general, I don't believe the hype about Iran. Past behavior generally predicts future behavior, right? Iran hasn't invaded anyone in a very very long time. Ahmadinjad may not be the nicest kid on the block (haven't met him) but surely he isn't stupid and knows that nuking the US is a bad bad idea.

So many of the lines trotted out about Iran were the same ones used to scare us into invading Iraq. Fool me once, phooey on you. Fool me twice....

Iran is the rabbit that spits in the bulldog's face, and I don't doubt for a moment that they will do it again.

Some of you are too young to remember or were not yet born when Iran took some of our countrymen and women hostage during the waning days of the 1970s, during the the Carter administration. They thumbed their noses at us for 444 days, basically daring us to blow them off the map. We didn't, of course, and the hostages were finally released when Ronald Reagan took office in January of 1981. But Iran has been a burr under our collective saddle for decades now, and knowing we have a weak President and a bitterly divided Congress, they're probably just waiting for the right moment to spit in our faces again.

That said......with one child in the Army and another in the Air Force, I don't want war, and I have never been an advocate of the U.S. being the world's policeman. I'd just as soon leave the barbarians in the Middle East to go on slaughtering each other like they have since Biblical times; we are NOT going to civilize them by whipping a little democracy on them, and I don't want another single American life to be lost in the process of trying. BUT---we can't stand by passively while Iran prepares to unleash nukes against Israel, let alone our own shores, and I for one believe they will. It's only a matter of time.

We usually go to war with little to no discussion. The second Iraq war had more discussion prior than any other in my memory. Usually there is some crisis and the leaders say they must act immediately. Or they quietly get a few troops on the ground and then move to support them. That's why I worry about our troops that were recently sent to Uganda.
I hope we'll take a standoff approach with Iran and not put our troops in the way. If Iran uses ships to block international shipping, sink em. If they launch an attack at Israel then use cruise missiles and drones to pull their teeth. We should be able to decimate their military without getting too involved.

Iran is the rabbit that spits in the bulldog's face, and I don't doubt for a moment that they will do it again.

Some of you are too young to remember or were not yet born when Iran took some of our countrymen and women hostage during the waning days of the 1970s, during the the Carter administration. They thumbed their noses at us for 444 days, basically daring us to blow them off the map. We didn't, of course, and the hostages were finally released when Ronald Reagan took office in January of 1981. But Iran has been a burr under our collective saddle for decades now, and knowing we have a weak President and a bitterly divided Congress, they're probably just waiting for the right moment to spit in our faces again.

That said......with one child in the Army and another in the Air Force, I don't want war, and I have never been an advocate of the U.S. being the world's policeman. I'd just as soon leave the barbarians in the Middle East to go on slaughtering each other like they have since Biblical times; we are NOT going to civilize them by whipping a little democracy on them, and I don't want another single American life to be lost in the process of trying. BUT---we can't stand by passively while Iran prepares to unleash nukes against Israel, let alone our own shores, and I for one believe they will. It's only a matter of time.

Those hostages didn't get taken in a vacuum, nor because someone didn't have anything better to do one day. The US helped engineer a coup d'etat to overthrow Mossadegh and installed the Shah. Would you appreciate it if another country installed a government in the US that served their interest and not ours? I find it hard to believe that that wouldn't bother you in the slightest. Is it any wonder, then, that they decided to overthrow the Shah and maybe throw America's meddling back in its face? I feel terribly bad for the hostages (and their families) that got caught in the middle and used as pawns, but I can't say I feel sorry for the US government. You mess in other people's affairs, it will eventually come back to bite you.

I also find it a little disturbing that you're willing to write them all off as barbarians when Iran has not invaded another country in well over a century. Can't say as much for lots of other countries....

As for Israel? Israel has nukes that everyone knows about but no one admits to knowing. Israel has one of the most well-trained militaries in the world. Iran does not. Iran has signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Israel has not.

i find it incomprehensible that as the failure of our iraq policy becomes more evident — even to its most determined advocates — we here are approving the same kind of policy toward iran. with iraq becoming more of a problem daily, the solution as envisioned by this legislation is to look for yet another fight. and we should not fool ourselves: this legislation sets the stage for direct conflict with iran. the resolution "calls upon all state parties to the treaty on the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons (npt), including the united states, to use all appropriate means to deter, dissuade, and prevent iran from acquiring nuclear weapons..." note the phrase "...use all appropriate means...."

it is somewhat ironic that we are again meddling in iranian affairs. students of history will recall that the us government's ill-advised coup against iranian leader mohammed mossadegh in 1953 and its subsequent installation of the shah as the supreme ruler led to intense hatred of the united states and eventually to the radical islamic revolution of 1979. one can only wonder what our relations would be with iran if not for the decades of meddling in that country's internal affairs. we likely would not be considering resolutions such as this. yet the solution to all the difficulties created by our meddling foreign policy always seems to always be yet more meddling. will congress ever learn?

America needs to mind its own business and stop trying to be the world's police. America has nukes, and is (so far) the only country in world to launch a nuclear attack on another country. Who are we to say another country shouldn't have nukes?

As for Israel? Israel has nukes that everyone knows about but no one admits to knowing. Israel has one of the most well-trained militaries in the world. Iran does not. Iran has signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Israel has not.

Israel has been itching for a war with Iran for years. If they want one, they need to have at it, and leave America out of it. With nuclear weapons and the most advanced military in the Middle East, Israel can take care if itself. America does not need to act as Israel's protector.

I don't know why the US felt compelled to instill the Shah in Iran. I just know that he was infamous for the use of his secret police and other abuses of his people.

It's saddening that neither of the two major US political parties seem content to keep US troops at home. It's not a question of sending our troops. The only difference is where they want to send them. I would be happy to stop being the world policeman. Is Ron Paul the only candidate who wants to keep our troops home?